What blows my mind is that such a large part of the playerbase actually believes that the rest of the playerbase are serial dog rapists, and that they will engage in serial dog rape behavior at the drop of a pin, because of a single sentence in a single page of documentation, despite the fact that there is a long standing policy against dog raping behavior. The fact that it is the first thing people start discussing, basically the only thing they discuss, and the thing they discuss most passionately... dog rape.

I guess it's like the fine people at FTL putting in a new spaceship type, and asking for feedback from their players, and the players keep asking if they're worried about the spaceship raping other spaceships.

What blows my mind is that such a large part of the playerbase actually believes that the rest of the playerbase are serial dog rapists, and that they will engage in serial dog rape behavior at the drop of a pin, because of a single sentence in a single page of documentation, despite the fact that there is a long standing policy against dog raping behavior. The fact that it is the first thing people start discussing, basically the only thing they discuss, and the thing they discuss most passionately... dog rape.

I guess it's like the fine people at FTL putting in a new spaceship type, and asking for feedback from their players, and the players keep asking if they're worried about the spaceship raping other spaceships.

It has nothing to do with believing that there will be many players who will want to Rp dog rape. When I look back at the posts after the document people are saying that the document looks great. I said it was very interesting but noted an area of concern with policy. The way it was written that was a possibility. Call me morbid if you want, but I would rather have official documentation that conforms to policy, especially on such a sensitive subject. If you're disappointed there wasn't more discussion about individual aspects of the documentation consider it a compliment that people embraced your ideas and that they were expanded upon sufficiently in the document that people didn't have more questions.

It needed to be changed and you say you aren't upset, yet it seems very clear that you are deeply personally attached to the document, unless you spew vehement curses as a matter of course. There are other good questions to ask and perhaps there will still be good discussion on them - - that doesn't make the issue that WAS found illegitimate. It doesn't make players perverts who obviously want to roleplay warg sex. You're blowing the whole thing way out of proportion.

There was a rule page in parallel RPI that specifically said that torture and rape had to be consented too. (It was worded that way) but the true rule was that rape was simply not allowed in any form. I found out the hard way.

I mention this because the way the document is worded could give someone the wrong impression on the rules.

Write some docs,
Have them thrown to the figurative dogs,
And see what kind of mood it leaves you in.

:P

God I want to play a warg though.

Oh btw we're gonna be able to learn blacksmithing and leatherworking and weaponmaking and fishing as wargs right? Cause otherwise players are gonna get bored, you know, and we gotta have our warg full-helms, and you know they'll need the best leathers if PVP is gonna be -

Shutting up ;) lol

I do find the suggestion for warg hunting crafts in that one thread intriguing though, and exactly what I imagined they would have when I was at the moot.

Last edited by Real on Wed Feb 25, 2015 4:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Everything gets smaller now the further that I go
Towards the mouth and the reunion of the known and the unknown
Consider yourself lucky if you think of it as home
You can move mountains with your misery if you don't

I'm not close to having enough rpp to play a warg -anyway-, but I wonder what you would think would happen if a female warg was the strongest in the pack? I mean, if she could hypothetically beat everyone up, what would really stop her from running the show? Also, is there anywhere in canon that states wargs are patriarchal (other than, you know, they are wolves, and wolves are like that). Not that I think there is anything wrong with that system persay, but I see no reason why, if a female was the strongest, etc etc. Might be rare, but I think it could happen. Hell, hyenas are matriarchal. So it has been done with dog-like pack animals. Thoughts?

LadyMizra wrote:I'm not close to having enough rpp to play a warg -anyway-, but I wonder what you would think would happen if a female warg was the strongest in the pack? I mean, if she could hypothetically beat everyone up, what would really stop her from running the show? Also, is there anywhere in canon that states wargs are patriarchal (other than, you know, they are wolves, and wolves are like that). Not that I think there is anything wrong with that system persay, but I see no reason why, if a female was the strongest, etc etc. Might be rare, but I think it could happen. Hell, hyenas are matriarchal. So it has been done with dog-like pack animals. Thoughts?

A male wouldn't submit to a female. A chieftain might keep one in confidence but wouldn't cow-tow to her under any circumstances. He could consider his leadership forfeit if he was beaten by a female, most likely, but she wouldn't be the one filling the power vacuum.

That would be pretty in character, as things go.

I hope you die right now, will you drink my chemical?

Brian wrote:See, the thing that I admire about WorkerDrone is that he's an optimist!

LadyMizra wrote:I'm not close to having enough rpp to play a warg -anyway-, but I wonder what you would think would happen if a female warg was the strongest in the pack? I mean, if she could hypothetically beat everyone up, what would really stop her from running the show? Also, is there anywhere in canon that states wargs are patriarchal (other than, you know, they are wolves, and wolves are like that). Not that I think there is anything wrong with that system persay, but I see no reason why, if a female was the strongest, etc etc. Might be rare, but I think it could happen. Hell, hyenas are matriarchal. So it has been done with dog-like pack animals. Thoughts?

A male wouldn't submit to a female. A chieftain might keep one in confidence but wouldn't cow-tow to her under any circumstances. He could consider his leadership forfeit if he was beaten by a female, most likely, but she wouldn't be the one filling the power vacuum.

That would be pretty in character, as things go.

the thing is, as far as in-character canon goes.. All of this would apply to both human soldiers and orcs as well, yet we tone down that certain part of LOTR's olde-timey setting because it would suck for female players to get excluded from combat or leadership roles if their character has lived long enough for it

A really bad sword with a short blade lies here.
look sword
This sword hardly even a sword. It's kind of really just a piece of metal bent like a sword. Its blade is rather short. Kind of pathetic, really.

I would actually argue that any warg - if beaten by a female - would submit to that female, the same as they would to a male. If she beats them, she's superior to them - end of story. Wargs respect strength more than anything else, after all. That includes if she somehow manages to usurp chiefdom from a male warg.

But that would also mean only that particular female would have breeding rights. That's bad for survival, and female led warg packs are probably few and far between because they just can't reproduce fast enough that way to hold out against other, larger packs encroaching on their turf.

So female wargs probably don't often challenge for the position and power of Chief, because pack survival is more important than personal ambition. (For males, however, that's not an issue because all it takes is a single strong male breeding within the pack to strengthen it.)

Croaker wrote:
But that would also mean only that particular female would have breeding rights. That's bad for survival, and female led warg packs are probably few and far between because they just can't reproduce fast enough that way to hold out against other, larger packs encroaching on their turf.

That's actually exactly why a female can't be used a leader, especially in a situation like this. Not to get weird about it, but a male can have many impregnated mates at a time, giving his genes a better chance at survival and propagation and good genes, whereas a female can only have one litter at a time with only one lineage.

Not to go all un-PC, but a female cannot be expected to lead under those circumstances, especially considering that once she gets pregnant for the first time she can't exactly fight to defend her position. The females of the pack would presumably be focusing more on continuing the species rather than being in prime fighting form. A female challenging a male seems like it would be an extremely rare event, if it happened at all.

Also this is totally unrelated but when I first saw this thread I thought it was about warg doctors and I was really confused.

Edit: also I realized I basically just said the same thing you did and now I can't delete my post. Oh well. I AGREE.

Tbh, if their were female ran warg packs, they would probably change the mating laws. And since there are many animal species where the females are dominant, and still run things while being pregnant, I see no reason it can't be the same here. Besides. There is nothing in the books saying warg structure is like how its outlined here. This is stuff we created to give wargs depth to be able to play them. So really, I see no reason at all that wargs -have- to be mandatorially male dominated.

Ps: I know movies are movies, but in the movies, Azog's warg is a female, and the matriarch of her Master's wargs. Hey, if its good enough for Peter Jackson....

In the words of a fellow gibbering, sputtering non-PC maniac I know, I really don't see why everything has to be completely socially just in the context of a fictionalized world in which role playing and writing occurs for the purposes of fun. Why equity has to be at the forefront of policy or personal decorum in which we act in character.

Though that's not to say I wouldn't support seeing a player rolling a female warg and then completely upsetting the balance of power somehow and defeating all-comers and becoming...chieftess? That isn't even a word. If it is, it is a silly word and henceforth I shall not use it, and shall not be deterred in that!

Why? Because it would be amusing, and I would roleplay completely true to form in response to it. That is to say, I would become a gibbering, sputtering non-PC maniac, in character.

I hope you die right now, will you drink my chemical?

Brian wrote:See, the thing that I admire about WorkerDrone is that he's an optimist!

I don't really think there needs to be less. There's already nothing stopping anyone from attempting to roleplay a female warrior-queen with long flowing locks and a shining steel sword.

Dave Poole, the sellsword from Sharteshane, is still going to treat her with contempt, but Dave Poole is but a poor tough, so his word doesn't count for much. Warrior-Queen Babe kicks his ass. But oh no! Some of his blood landed on the Magister-General of El-Amin!

Where was I going with this? Nevermind.

I hope you die right now, will you drink my chemical?

Brian wrote:See, the thing that I admire about WorkerDrone is that he's an optimist!

Even if a female warg were to somehow rise to a position of prominence, the reaction wouldn't be automagically accepting and equitable. There IS going to be sexual bias, that's kind of unavoidable when you're discussing what is basically a patriarchal society. Does that mean that I support inequality of the sexes or believe in my real life that women are inferior and can't hold positions of power? No, not at all. It would be odd if I did considering I'm a woman myself. But everything can't be altered to suit the obsession with all aspects of all things being politically correct that permeates western society these days.

tl;dr, on the occasion that a female warg does demonstrate dominance, I think it would be completely acceptable in game for it to be met with barely disguised resentment and for it to be a very short reign.

As for equality in the game, I've played female warriors before. Actually they've basically been all I've played. I was rather inept at it because as a player I am not the most war- or tacitcal-minded person, but despite undisguised female warriors being very uncanon I still was able to progress. So it's not about there being less eqality in the game at all, it's about something going glaringly against what seems to be a pretty logical societal tenet.

Celairel wrote:Even if a female warg were to somehow rise to a position of prominence, the reaction wouldn't be automagically accepting and equitable. There IS going to be sexual bias, that's kind of unavoidable when you're discussing what is basically a patriarchal society. Does that mean that I support inequality of the sexes or believe in my real life that women are inferior and can't hold positions of power? No, not at all. It would be odd if I did considering I'm a woman myself. But everything can't be altered to suit the obsession with all aspects of all things being politically correct that permeates western society these days.

tl;dr, on the occasion that a female warg does demonstrate dominance, I think it would be completely acceptable in game for it to be met with barely disguised resentment and for it to be a very short reign.

As for equality in the game, I've played female warriors before. Actually they've basically been all I've played. I was rather inept at it because as a player I am not the most war- or tacitcal-minded person, but despite undisguised female warriors being very uncanon I still was able to progress. So it's not about there being less eqality in the game at all, it's about something going glaringly against what seems to be a pretty logical societal tenet.

Yes, this is exactly what I'm trying to say. It's not about what people in game say you can or can't do, you can do it anyway. You can do whatever you want, so long as you keep in mind some characters might not like it, for whatever reason, be it an established bias or resentment that rings more personal. It could have nothing to do with gender, it could be about eating apples in an orange only room.

I hope you die right now, will you drink my chemical?

Brian wrote:See, the thing that I admire about WorkerDrone is that he's an optimist!